"Nick Kraal wrote:>
> Don't really know where to begin with implementing MPLS in an ISP
network.
> Most of literature out there is for IP-VPN networks.
I also need where to begin with MPLS implementation, and How much
really it is improtant for Class C or Class A ISPs.
---pankaj
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Zaheer Aziz" <zaziz@cisco.com>
> To: "pankaj" <pankaj@worldgatein.net>
> Cc: <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 12:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [nsp] BGP loop detection
>
>
> > At 04:01 PM 6/18/2002 +0530, pankaj wrote:
> > >More easier solution is as Nick and Philip said.
> > >
> > >Use static route for eachother's /19 pointing to your router. Or
just
> > >use default route pointing to ur router.
> > >Thats enough for the situation u describe
> >
> > Nick wrote "/19 is actually for two separate businesses; one a
tier-2 ISP
> and
> > the other VoIP provider"
> >
> > I cant imagine a tier-2 ISP running statics and defaults. They
dont have a
> > backbone
> > but certainly they should be aware of ups and downs of Internet
routes.
> > Moreover if
> > Nick Kraal's company decided to run MPLS, this customer would be a
perfect
> > candidate
> > for Carrier Supporting Carriers CsC described at.
> >
> >
>
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios120/120new
ft/120
> limit/120st/120st14/csc.htm
> >
> >
> > My 2c
> > Zaheer
> >
> >
> > >--pankaj
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Zaheer Aziz" <zaziz@cisco.com>
> > >To: "Nick Kraal" <nick@arc.net.my>
> > >Cc: <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>
> > >Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 10:44 PM
> > >Subject: Re: [nsp] BGP loop detection
> > >
> > >
> > > > At 10:17 PM 6/17/2002 +0800, Nick Kraal wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Another option,if you continue to run EBGP with them, is to
have
> > >them
> > > > configure
> > > >
> > > > neighbor EBGP-address allowas-in
> > > >
> > > > at their EBGP boxes peering with you.
> > > >
> > > > This will accept paths with local as in the AS_PATH. It is
mainly
> > >used in
> > > > MPLS-VPN scenarios but can certainly be applicable here.
> > > >
> > > > Zaheer
> > > > >We have a customer that has transit services from us. They
have
> > >split their
> > > > >network into two /19 and run BGP with us at two different
> > >locations. Each
> > > > >/19 is actually for two seperate businesses; one a tier-2 ISP
and
> > >the other
> > > > >VoIP provider. Two physically sperate networks are also
running the
> > >same ASN
> > > > >and are to peer with each other via our network. There is no
> > >internal
> > > > >interconnectivity between them or any IGP running.
> > > > >
> > > > >The problem lies in that to reach each other they need to
'transit'
> > >via our
> > > > >network and according to BGP, one cannot announce back the
client
> > >prefixes
> > > > >learnt from the other network and vice versa as both of them
are
> > >running the
> > > > >same ASN. This is to prevent routing loops.
> > > > >
> > > > >In this case is there a method to overwrite this so that the
first
> > >/19
> > > > >network will be able to reach the second /19 network via
ours?
> > > > >
> > > > >Thanks in advance.
> > > > >
> > > > >-nick/
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:00 EDT